Question about XP SP1a
Whats the easiest way to tell whether an XP system is running Service Pack 1 or Service Pack 1a if both still have the MS JVM installed? The System Properties still say Service Pack 1 and the System Information tool shows both the SP1 machine and the SP1a machine as having the same version of XP.
Whats the easiest way to tell whether an XP system is running Service Pack 1 or Service Pack 1a if both still have the MS JVM installed? The System Properties still say "Service Pack 1" and the System Information tool shows both the SP1 machine and the SP1a machine as having the same version of XP. Is the lack of the MS Java VM the only real difference between SP1 and SP1a or is there more?
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Quote:Whats the easiest way to tell whether an XP system is running Service Pack 1 or Service Pack 1a if both still have the MS JVM installed? The System Properties still say "Service Pack 1" and the System Information tool shows both the SP1 machine and the SP1a machine as having the same version of XP. Is the lack of the MS Java VM the only real difference between SP1 and SP1a or is there more?
I'm pretty sure the JVM is the only difference.
Jim
I'm pretty sure the JVM is the only difference.
Jim
According to MS though, if you install SP1a on a system that already has the JVM installed (either via Windows Update, seperate download or SP1) the JVM isn't touched. If that's the case then, is there any real reason to install SP1a over SP1?
The only reason SP1a was released is because the courts told MS to do so - scary isn't it, government getting involved in what can and cannot be released, and you think MS are "out of order"?
Anyway, the only difference is that the MS Jave is removed.
You are then supposed to go to Sun's site like a good boy and download their's instead.
Personally I found it slow, clunky and so full of bugs you wouldn't believe.
That's why even when I did my latest reinstallation I used SP1 and not SP1a as I wanted the MS Java.
If I'm forced to do a reinstallation again after the release of SP2 I'll install SP1 first and then SP2 over the top - only way to make sure you get the MS Java and are not forced to get the Sun one.
Anyway, the only difference is that the MS Jave is removed.
You are then supposed to go to Sun's site like a good boy and download their's instead.
Personally I found it slow, clunky and so full of bugs you wouldn't believe.
That's why even when I did my latest reinstallation I used SP1 and not SP1a as I wanted the MS Java.
If I'm forced to do a reinstallation again after the release of SP2 I'll install SP1 first and then SP2 over the top - only way to make sure you get the MS Java and are not forced to get the Sun one.
Just a question, but how does that ruling affect people outside the US.
Obviously the US courts have no juristiction in Australia, UK, Canada etc so will non-US purchasers still eb able to download a SP with JVM included.
Like you, I have tried both and think that if you are using IE you should be using the JVM that is designed to integrate with it.
No point finding a key then trying to build a lock around it.
Just in case, I'll keep a copy of MSJVM around, just in case.
Obviously the US courts have no juristiction in Australia, UK, Canada etc so will non-US purchasers still eb able to download a SP with JVM included.
Like you, I have tried both and think that if you are using IE you should be using the JVM that is designed to integrate with it.
No point finding a key then trying to build a lock around it.
Just in case, I'll keep a copy of MSJVM around, just in case.
I think in all honesty it is just too much hassle to start releasing two versions of SP's - one for the UK and one for say the US.
Also people would find a way of installing the UK version with Java on their US versions - then the US government would get all upset again.
I personally felt all these anti-MS rulings were about choice for the people, that things should not be forced on people.
But they were forced to remove Java from the SP, not offer it as an optional installation.
I believe that unless MS can get the ruling overturned in the courts then they are actually going to totally stop production and development on their own JVM.
Then we'll have no choice but to use Sun's - If this happens we can only hope Sun get their fingers out of their arses and actually release something worth installing.
Also people would find a way of installing the UK version with Java on their US versions - then the US government would get all upset again.
I personally felt all these anti-MS rulings were about choice for the people, that things should not be forced on people.
But they were forced to remove Java from the SP, not offer it as an optional installation.
I believe that unless MS can get the ruling overturned in the courts then they are actually going to totally stop production and development on their own JVM.
Then we'll have no choice but to use Sun's - If this happens we can only hope Sun get their fingers out of their arses and actually release something worth installing.
